So I recently had an interesting conversation with another vet over which QB should be the starter. As most of you know I run a passing team and have my own opinions. However this vet was adamant about his opinions too and we couldn't agree. Now, honestly, I may not pay as much attention as I once did (although I think I've had some recent success) so I'm curious: Which QB would all of you start? If you could explain why that'd be great too!

QB 1 QB2
Ath 71 82
Str 71 52
GI 68 64
Tech 75 79

If you think it matters QB1 had an avg formation IQ in the 40's, while QB2's was in the teens.

Also, this is for who would you start right now. So work ethic and potential should not be a factor.

I would start #2. I value Tech more than GI and don't put much consideration into Str as long as it is above 40pts. Also, GI grows faster than other cores, IMO an Ath of 82 will grow GI and help overall QB play.

Id go with QB1, based on TECH and GI being essentially equal among the two. I would then give the nod to STR as the tie breaker. I do care about ATH, but it is not far enough off for me to care in this case. If it was 50 pts different in ATH I would probably go with QB2.

It's QB 2 and it's not even close. I'm the vet he had the discussion with.
QB 1 was a senior for Florida in Warner.
QB 2 was a true frosh starter. QB 1 under a different coach the previous season produced 33(I thought it was 38 until I looked at the numbers) total offensive touchdowns. QB 2 this season under the new coach produced 71 total offensive touchdowns, 61.1% completion rate, 3,929 yards, 45 TD's, 6 INT's, 1 rushing TD in 12 starts with 14 overall games played.

When I say produced I mean led the offense passing and rushing as a whole to those numbers.

As I told Bull when we chatted on sitemail, QB 1 would have to have a lot more separation in ratings for me to start him over QB 2.
QB 2 was already better in 7 of 12 categories than QB 1.

Posted by mrfortune3 on 10/3/2013 3:28:00 AM (view original):It's QB 2 and it's not even close. I'm the vet he had the discussion with.
QB 1 was a senior for Florida in Warner.
QB 2 was a true frosh starter. QB 1 under a different coach the previous season produced 33(I thought it was 38 until I looked at the numbers) total offensive touchdowns. QB 2 this season under the new coach produced 71 total offensive touchdowns, 61.1% completion rate, 3,929 yards, 45 TD's, 6 INT's, 1 rushing TD in 12 starts with 14 overall games played.

When I say produced I mean led the offense passing and rushing as a whole to those numbers.

As I told Bull when we chatted on sitemail, QB 1 would have to have a lot more separation in ratings for me to start him over QB 2.
QB 2 was already better in 7 of 12 categories than QB 1.

Is it a fair comparison when there is a change in coaches? I'm just asking. Also, what are the other attributes of the players? Given the information that was provided originally, I still think that most coaches made the right choice. As one other coach pointed out, there are other items that need to be considered. If QB1 is a Senior and QB2 is a Freshman, I'd be more likely to start QB2 in order to let him grow, assuming that QB1 has not been the starter before...and maybe had not been stellar. I routinely start a RS Frosh over a RS Junior when I think they are close and the Frosh is the "QB of the future", because he will grow like crazy. In my system I always RS my QBs and they will take over the offense as RS Frosh or RS Junior

Posted by mrfortune3 on 10/3/2013 3:28:00 AM (view original):It's QB 2 and it's not even close. I'm the vet he had the discussion with.
QB 1 was a senior for Florida in Warner.
QB 2 was a true frosh starter. QB 1 under a different coach the previous season produced 33(I thought it was 38 until I looked at the numbers) total offensive touchdowns. QB 2 this season under the new coach produced 71 total offensive touchdowns, 61.1% completion rate, 3,929 yards, 45 TD's, 6 INT's, 1 rushing TD in 12 starts with 14 overall games played.

When I say produced I mean led the offense passing and rushing as a whole to those numbers.

As I told Bull when we chatted on sitemail, QB 1 would have to have a lot more separation in ratings for me to start him over QB 2.
QB 2 was already better in 7 of 12 categories than QB 1.

Hey bud, I wasn't going to out you but since you did it yourself...lol. Respectfully I disagree. Since they were different coaches (and probably different game-plans) I don't think you can compare stats. I've had a bit of success since going to an all-pass offense (and starting to pay attention again...thank you Champ and Swooft) so I think I'll stick with what I think works. I look at Tech, GI, STR in that order. I do look at Athl but it is a distant 4th. Honestly, in D1A, I never look at WE and take just a quick glance at potential. I also do not look at Elus, Hands, Blk, Tkl...lol...or anything else. All that other stuff is a tie-breaker to me. It's noise. It's like telling me that Gino Smith is a better QB than Ben Rothlesberger because Gino is faster.

I would've RS'ed the FR and started the SR. My goal, every year, is to win that year 1st; set-up for the future 2nd. In my mind QB is clearly better but that's because I value STR and Athl in an exact opposite valuation as you. That's cool - it's what makes the game.